Graphic by Terele Jerricks
Half a century ago, Peter Jensen launched Project Censored, in part as a response to how the Watergate break-in was covered. Richard Nixon didn’t censor the initial reporting, but he didn’t have to. The press simply didn’t cover it with any serious scrutiny until well after Nixon was elected. The story didn’t reach the American people when it mattered most — when they could have done something about it directly themselves, before they went to the polls in November 1972.
Reflecting this, Jensen saw censorship as working differently in a democracy than in a dictatorship. He defined it as “the suppression of information, whether purposeful or not, by any method — including bias, omission, under-reporting, or self-censorship — that prevents the public from fully knowing what is happening in society.”
That happened with Watergate, though the truth belatedly came out. And an echo of the same sort of thing happened just as I was writing this half a century later. Six members of Congress who had served in the military or the CIA released a video accurately informing those serving, as they had, that they have the right — and in some cases the duty — to refuse unlawful or unconstitutional orders. President Trump responded on social media by falsely claiming their video message was “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH,” but the New York Times relegated the story to page 16, with a headline that didn’t mention Trump’s call for their execution. “No wonder Trump thinks he can get away with anything,” said Mark Jacob, a former top editor at both the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune.
This was only a faint echo of what happened with Watergate — especially given the Times’ diminished gate-keeping role. But those echoes are everywhere around us, every day. That same dynamic of suppression of information by under-reporting and self-censorship is constantly at play, with the same consequence of preventing the public from fully knowing what’s happening in society — particularly in time to do something about it.
For half a century now, Project Censored has been bringing these omissions to light, and while each story highlights a particular omission, they are often complex and interrelated to each other. There’s a perfect example in this year’s top censored story — “ICE Solicits Social Media Surveillance Contracts to Identify Critics.” Government spying on, suppressing and even criminalizing its critics goes back at least to World War I as a systematic endeavor, but new elements have intertwined with it over time. Racial targeting, private contracting and omnipresent surveillance technology are all present in this most recent example, and are routinely censored in other settings as well.
It’s also an example of systemic abusive policing, which shows up again in stories seven and eight, targeting the homeless for private profit in the first story, and killing four people a day in the second one, mostly in response to 9/11 calls, the majority of which involved a non-violent offense, or no offense at all. Racial targeting is also involved in this story (with Black people and Native Americans far more likely to be killed), as well as in stories number three and four, regarding systemic exploitation of Native Americans and targeting of pro-Palestinian activists, respectively.
Stories four through six involve tech surveillance in different ways, not just targeting activists but also systematically blocking data privacy protections for everyone, and using surveillance technology to harm workers and disrupt unionization at Amazon and Walmart, the largest private employers in America.
In turn, the class exploitation and oppression involved in this last example appears in two others as well, number seven, about private companies reaping over $100 million to sweep homeless camps in California (doing nothing to solve the problem), and number 10 about about the extreme under-representation of working class Americans in state legislatures — a censored story about censored voices that fittingly rounds out the list.
This is the deeper point of Project Censored’s list: That it’s not just about this or that suppressed and under-reported story, it’s about a whole different way of seeing the world if that systemic censoring were stripped away. Here, then, is Project Censored’s half-century anniversary list, so you can see for yourself what that means.
“Apparently, ICE is feeling it might deal with a bit more backlash than normal now that Trump is back in charge and promising to expel as many immigrants as he can as quickly as he can.” So wrote Techdirt contributor Tim Cushing in February 2025, commenting on reporting by Sam Biddle for The Intercept, based on a lengthy ICE bid request also reported on by the Independent. It solicited private contractors to “monitor and locate ‘negative’ social media discussion” about the agency.
Biddle noted it was “nearly identical” to one from 2020, “which resulted in a $5.5 million contract between [ICE] and Barbaricum, a Washington-based defense and intelligence contractor.” But given the much more sweeping and aggressive role ICE was now poised for, the significance was more chilling. “People who simply criticize ICE online could be pulled into the dragnet,” Biddle wrote. Saying the document cited increased threats was “being far too kind,” Cushing noted, since “The request for services simply says this is happening, without actually citing anything” as evidence.
Social media content “hostile to ICE” could encompass millions of posts per day, but the document specified that content creators should be assessed for “proclivity for violence” using “social and behavioral sciences” and “psychological profiles.” After compiling personal information (Social Security numbers, addresses, etc.), contractors are to provide ICE with a “photograph, partial legal name, partial date of birth, possible city, possible work affiliations, possible school or university affiliation, and any identified possible family members or associates.” It also requests “facial recognition capabilities that could take a photograph of a subject and search the Internet to find all relevant information associated with the subject.”
While the document starts “as though this is just a preventative measure to ensure the safety of government employees,” Cushing noted, “there’s plenty of wording later in the document that makes it clear ICE is looking for tech that allows it to monitor people simply because they don’t like ICE.”
The First Amendment threats are clear, Cushing noted:
The government shouldn’t be actively monitoring social media users, much less for the stated purpose of tallying the amount of negative references caught in the dragnet. Even if all the information is ‘open source’ (i.e., scraped from publicly-accessible social media accounts), this is not a legitimate use of government power. It’s especially questionable when the agency desiring to deploy this power can’t seem to differentiate clearly between negative comments and ‘threats’ against ICE personnel.
Again, the bid request wasn’t new. “In 2019, the Guardian exposed that ICE agents had used a series of fake social media profiles linked to a fictitious university to entrap foreign students allegedly seeking to stay in the United States illegally,” Project Censored noted. Further abuses using fake profiles were reported by the Guardian in 2023 as well. That same year, writing for 404 Media, John Cox reported on ICE’s use of a system “to help the agency scrutinize social media posts, determine if they are ‘derogatory’ to the U.S., and then use that information as part of immigration enforcement.” This was based on documents from an ACLU Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
While Forbes and the New York Times have covered ICE’s investment in digital technologies targeting immigrants, there was no corporate media coverage of the planned targeting of ICE critics at the time of Project Censored’s evaluation.
“Nearly 30 million people are living in areas of the US with limited water supplies,” Carey Gillam reported for The New Lede environmental news website in January 2025. But that’s based on a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) study — the first of its kind — that assessed water availability in the United States from 2010 to 2020, with a special focus on water quality. And with worsening conditions due to climate change, things could get significantly worse. Project Censored also noted two other concerns from the top 10 lists of the last two years: the problem of saltwater intrusion and pollution from “forever chemicals” (PFAS), which don’t break down naturally and are linked to cancer, liver problems, birth defects and a host of other serious diseases.
USGS Director David Applegate warned of “increasing challenges to this vital resource,” Gillam reported, adding that “People who are considered ‘socially vulnerable’ have a higher risk of experiencing limited water supplies.”
Widespread pollution was a concern “in waterways across the US Midwest and High Plains regions where worrisome levels of nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations – tied in large part to large animal agriculture operations – can pose a threat to human health,” she noted, adding:
The USGS said that “substantial areas” of aquifers that provide about one-third of public water supplies have elevated concentrations of contaminants such as arsenic, manganese, radionuclides, and nitrate, and that low-income and minority-dominated communities and people with domestic wells as their drinking water source experience increased exposure to this type of drinking water contamination.
Project Censored noted specific examples of problems in Texas “because of ongoing drought, infrastructure challenges, and international water rights disputes,” and Florida, with “shortages of fresh water because of rising populations and overexploitation of groundwater … exacerbated by global warming, which has led to more intense, more frequent floods and hurricanes that overwhelm wastewater systems, as well as to periods of drought.”
Elsewhere, “In Virginia, large data centers use as much as five million gallons of water a day, according to a May 2024 report in Grist,” they noted. “Tech companies are consuming massive amounts of groundwater in areas that are already facing water shortages due to rising temperatures.”
Project Censored then widened the lens in two ways. First, it noted reporting by Stephan Prager of Common Dreams based on a joint U.S./UN report, Drought Hotspots Around the World 2023-2025. “This is not a dry spell. This is a slow-moving global catastrophe, the worst I’ve ever seen,” report co-author Dr. Mark Svoboda said. “This report underscores the need for systematic monitoring of how drought affects lives, livelihoods, and the health of the ecosystems that we all depend on.” In this context, in 2024, “48 of the 50 U.S. states faced drought conditions, the highest proportion ever seen,” Prager wrote.
Second, it noted a Guardian report that “The Trump administration has ordered the closure of 25 scientific centers that monitor US waters for flooding and drought, and manage supply levels to ensure communities around the country don’t run out of water,” essentially blinding us to the problem.
“Both the New York Times and Washington Post have covered the fact that large swaths of the United States are currently struggling with drought conditions,” Project Censored noted. But this discussion is typically framed in terms of the “economic threat to agriculture and other industries rather than as a direct threat to human life.” As of July 2025, Newsweek was the only U.S. corporate news outlet that appeared to have discussed the USGS report on limited water supplies.
Government mistreatment of Indigenous communities was the subject of a series of articles published in 2024-25 by ProPublica, High Country News and Grist, which were picked up by other independent news outlets but were largely ignored by the corporate media.
The plight of tribal colleges due to longstanding underfunding was reported on by Matt Krupnick in ProPublica, while Anna Smith and Maria Parazo Rose reported on a detailed collaborative High Country News/Grist investigation of how states profit from “trust lands” held on federal Indigenous reservations, generating funding for, among other things, public state universities. This follows on earlier reporting by Grist and other partners in 2020, focused on how the 1862 Morrill Act granted expropriated Indigenous land to state governments in order to fund universities. Thus, there’s a deep, longstanding connection between these two facets of historic injustice.
“In the 1970s, Congress committed to funding a higher education system controlled by Indigenous communities,” Krupnick explained. “These tribal colleges and universities were intended to serve students who’d been disadvantaged by the nation’s history of violence and racism toward Native Americans, including efforts to eradicate their languages and cultures.” There are now 37 schools in the system, spanning 14 states, but they’ve always been woefully underfunded.
In the original 1978 law, funding was set at $8,000 annually per student affiliated with a tribe, with adjustments for inflation. But those levels have never been met. “Since 2010, per-student funding has been as low as $5,235 and sits at just under $8,700 today,” Krupnick reported, compared to about $40,000 per student if the law had been followed. In total, it’s $250 million less than was promised.
While the failures have been longstanding and bipartisan, as Project Censored described, they’ve gotten even worse under Trump. In a March 2025 follow-up, Krupnick reported, “At least $7 million in USDA grants to tribal colleges and universities have been suspended,” affecting both student scholarships and food and agricultural research.
At the same time, Project Censored noted, “federal policy allows state governments to profit from tribal ‘trust lands’ which support, among other things, state land grant universities.”
In 2020, writing for High Country News, Robert Lee and Tristan Ahtone reported on the original sin of the land grant universities’ creation under the 1862 Morrill Act, and its consequences. It redistributed nearly 11 million acres, “an area larger than Massachusetts and Connecticut combined,” that was “broken up into almost 80,000 parcels of land, scattered mostly across 24 Western states,” they reported. They “reconstructed approximately 10.7 million acres taken from nearly 250 tribes, bands and communities through over 160 violence-backed land cessions, a legal term for the giving up of territory.”
Then, Project Censored said, in February 2024, came the Grist/High Country News report, “detailing how 1.6 million acres of ‘trust lands’ managed by state agencies ‘generate millions of dollars for public schools, universities, penitentiaries, hospitals and other state institutions, typically through grazing, logging, mining and oil and gas production.’”
These lands were seized during what’s known as the Allotment Era, following the passage of the 1887 General Allotment Act, also known as the Dawes Act. As Project Censored summarized: “The federal government seized ninety million acres of reservation land from the tribes, labeling it as ‘surplus,’ and gave it to non-Native owners and states entering the union. The program dismantled tribal power and opened tribal lands and natural resources to non-Native citizens.”
States furthered the process of carving up and dissolving tribal lands, some of which resulted in state-owned lands inside of reservations — 83 of them in 10 states, according to their research, which resulted in a database of state trust land lessees, searchable by Native American reservation. This involved painstaking research, since many states don’t make trust land data public. “Even in the obscure world of trust lands, states’ holdings within reservations have been almost completely unknown until now,” Smith and Rose noted. “The presence of state lands on reservations complicates issues of tribal jurisdiction in regards to land use and management and undercuts tribal sovereignty.
“In some cases, tribes lease these state trust lands within their reservations — essentially paying to use what was once their own land,” they wrote. “An estimated 58,000 acres across several states are leased back to Indigenous tribes for agriculture, grazing, and other uses.”
Their report cited the case of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Montana, which “may have created a model for how tribes can negotiate for large-scale transfers of land back to tribal ownership,” they said. “In 2020, Congress passed a water-rights settlement that cleared the way for the transfer of nearly 30,000 acres of Montana state trust land back to the tribe,” and Montana will receive federal lands elsewhere in exchange.
“Corporate news media have largely ignored these issues,” Project Censored noted, except for a New York Times report about tribes and students suing over layoffs dictated by Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency, but it neglected historical underfunding described by ProPublica. A similar story ran in the Washington Post.
“A sweeping crackdown on posts on Instagram and Facebook that are critical of Israel—or even vaguely supportive of Palestinians—was directly orchestrated by the government of Israel,” since Oct. 7, 2023, Drop Site News reported in April 2025, calling it “the largest mass censorship operation in modern history.”
“The data show that Meta has complied with 94% of takedown requests issued by Israel since October 7, 2023,” they reported. “Israel is the biggest originator of takedown requests globally,” which “allows individuals, organizations, and government officials to request the removal of content that allegedly violates Meta’s policies.” This resulted in “an estimated 38.8 million additional posts being ‘actioned upon’ across Facebook and Instagram since late 2023. ‘Actioned upon’ in Facebook terms means that a post was either removed, banned, or suppressed.”
The report was based on internal company data supplied by whistle-blowers and confirmed by “multiple independent sources inside Meta.” While a significant majority of Israel’s requests “fall under Meta’s ‘terrorism’ or ‘violence and incitement’ categories,” the reporters noted, all of them “contain the same complaint text, according to the leaked information, regardless of the substance of the underlying content being challenged.” None of them describes the exact nature of the content being reported, “even though the requests link to an average of 15 different pieces of content.”
The requests “have overwhelmingly targeted users from Arab and Muslim-majority nations,” but the takedown campaign is global in scope, resulting in censorship of posts from users in more than 60 different countries. Not only is it censoring users in real time, “Israel’s censorship project will echo well into the future,” they reported, “the AI program Meta is currently training how to moderate content will base future decisions on the successful takedown of content critical of Israel’s genocide,” according to their inside sources.
Project Censored noted, “The Council on American-Islamic Relations condemned Meta’s actions, stating, ‘Meta must stop censoring criticism of the Israeli government under the guise of combating antisemitism, and Meta must stop training artificial intelligence tools to do so.’” And it highlights the fact that Israel censors and controls press coverage of its military operations, as reported in June 2025, by the Committee to Protect Journalists.
“The Drop Site News article on Meta’s compliance with Israeli censorship requests has been republished by independent outlets, including ZNetwork and Jewish Voice for Labour,” Project Censored noted, “but despite its alarming revelations, this story does not appear to have been picked up by any major US newspapers or broadcast news outlets as of July 2025.” Nor is there any sign that Meta will stop censoring users at Israel’s request.
“Big Tech companies are actively attempting to undermine legislation that protects consumer data privacy,” Project Censored reports, using the same playbook tobacco companies used in the 1990s. This was reported by Jake Snow in an article published by Tech Policy Press and the ACLU of Northern California in October 2024.
“The biggest names in technology are trying to use their might to force Congress to override crucial state-level privacy laws that have protected people for years,” Snow wrote. Federal law overrides state or local law whenever there’s a conflict — a legal doctrine known as “preemption.” There’s actually a three-step strategy involved, he explained.
Step one is “Respond to a PR crisis with a flood of deceptive bills.” A Big Tobacco example was laws creating “smoking sections” to defeat laws creating outright bans, such as the Beverly Hills smoke-free restaurant ordinance. Big Tech today has “opened a firehose of lobbying money to replace real privacy laws with fake industry alternatives as ineffective as non-smoking sections,” Snow wrote. He cites a 2021 Virginia law that was “provided by an Amazon lobbyist” and “predictably, it was ‘just what Big Tech wants’”
Step two is “Point to the patchwork” of ineffective laws they’ve produced. Big Tobacco did this in the ’90s, he noted. “They pushed op-eds arguing that a ‘patchwork of local laws is no way to fight smoking.’” Similarly, “Tech lobbyists love to complain about the ‘patchwork’—meaning diverse state privacy laws. It’s the tech industry’s favorite talking point,” Snow wrote. “They even created a website called ‘United for Privacy: Ending the Privacy Patchwork.’”
Step three is “Use preemption to kill the grassroots movement” by making further progress almost impossible. “The final step for Big Tobacco then, and Big Tech now, is to use preemption to erase state laws and curb a state’s ability to pass new, stronger laws in the future,” Snow wrote. Federal legislation need not preempt state and local law. Like the federal minimum wage law, it can be a floor, not a ceiling. “Federal law should establish a foundation that cities and states can build on, not a ceiling blocking all future progress,” Snow argued.
“Cities and states are nimbler than Congress, and historically are where real change begins. In 1972, California enshrined a right to privacy in the state constitution that offers powerful protections against modern privacy abuses,” he explained. But “Once state legislatures are sealed, power decreases dramatically for grassroots activists, communities of color, and other groups that have limited access to the halls of Congress and far fewer resources to make their voices heard.”
It’s already been tried. The House version of Trump’s controversial “Big Beautiful Bill” included a provision “shielding tech companies for ten years from being sued in state courts for negligence, privacy violations, or misuse of artificial intelligence.” The Senate removed that provision, but Big Tech will surely try again.
These efforts to override state-level regulations “have received only partial corporate news coverage,” Project Censored noted. It cited several examples from the New York Times, Time magazine and others dealing with different aspects of the big picture Snow described, “However, none of this reporting has fully addressed the scale and coordinated effort detailed in Snow’s report, nor has it drawn attention to the clear historical parallels between current Big Tech strategies and the precedent set by Big Tobacco in its attempts to delay and dilute public health regulations.”
Walmart and Amazon are the two largest retailers in America, with a combined workforce of over 2.7 million workers (not counting Amazon drivers), whose lives have been made more miserable by the use of surveillance technology, as documented in an April 2024 report from Oxfam America, “At Work and Under Watch.” The report finds that “regimes of measurement, surveillance, discipline, and data collection deployed by both companies unduly punish workers, stifle worker voice, and have negative impacts on worker health, safety, and well-being,” as Alex Press reported for Jacobin.
“In 2018, Walmart patented surveillance technology designed for management to eavesdrop on workers, track customer interactions, and oversee all employee movements,” Project Censored noted. “Amazon uses similar tracking methods, including a rating system that scores worker productivity, providing real-time feedback on individual workers’ speed and efficiency.”
Oxfam’s report drew on quantitative data from worker surveys at both companies, as well as qualitative research interviews.
“An Amazon worker in North Carolina compares the experience to Netflix’s Squid Game, stating that ‘Every three days, first responders are called to [our] facility. And when I say that it’s like [Squid Game], you see co-workers, you see friends, some workers have relatives, you see relatives who pass out, who are taken out of their facility on the stretcher,’” Press reported, adding, “If you get injured, a Walmart worker in California explains, it is ‘almost always your fault. Management would not negotiate this with you at all. You would be penalized for it because they would deem that you were working unsafe and ignore all the other possible reasons for why you got injured.’”
Key findings included:
“One might argue that unionizing could help workers resist surveillance,” Project Censored noted, but Amazon defeated a unionization effort in North Carolina in February 2025. However, “union organizers believe the vote was the result of Amazon’s nonstop intimidation of its employees,” and an academic study of an earlier organizing effort in Bessemer, Alabama, backs them up, as reported by The American Prospect in March 2025.
“The company manipulated workplace devices to send workers anti-union messages and to ask questions that employees say were intended to assess their support for the union,” Project Censored summarized. “Amazon also monitored the social media activity of its employees—including Facebook groups, many of which were private, and subreddits—to investigate posts that contained complaints from warehouse workers or plans for strikes and protests.”
“Amazon is not just tweaking pre-existing AI systems to make unionization harder to achieve for workers, but actually converting and weaponizing sprawling systems into new tools for quashing dissent,” the Prospect concluded.
Aside from some coverage of these issues by independent and specialist news outlets, Project Censored noted, “there has been zero corporate media coverage of Amazon and Walmart’s surveillance and mistreatment of warehouse employees or of Oxfam’s ‘At Work and Under Watch’ report.”
Criminalizing homelessness doesn’t solve the problem — in fact, it makes things worse — but it does make some folks a lot of money.
“In total, private firms have been paid at least $100m to clear homeless camps, an investigation by the Guardian and Type Investigations has found,” Brian Barth wrote for the Guardian on April 16, 2024. But that was a serious undercount, he hastened to add. “The 14 municipalities and public agencies from which spending details could be obtained represent a small slice of such spending in the state.”
Still, the wastefulness was still obvious. “It can cost millions to clear a single camp. Marinship, a Bay Area construction company, received $3.4m to dismantle an unhoused community with about 200 residents,” Barth wrote. In Silicon Valley, Santa Clara signed a three-and-a-half-year, $1 million contract “despite having documented only 264 unsheltered residents at the time.”
And it costs cities even more. “The police presence at one sweep in Los Angeles cost an estimated $2m,” he noted.
As for what good it does, the answer is almost certainly none on two counts: It doesn’t reduce homelessness, but it does cause serious harm. “A 2024 RAND study found that policy change — such as encampment sweeps and camping bans — in three Los Angeles neighborhoods temporarily reduced visible homelessness, but within months the unsheltered populations rose slightly in two of the communities and doubled in the third,” Robbie Sequeira reported for Stateline in January 2025.
At the same time, “For homeless people, these sweeps take an enormous toll,” Barth wrote. “Many unhoused residents report being swept over and over, often multiple times in a year. Modeling based on data collected in Boston has shown that hospitalization and death rates are expected to increase significantly among encampment residents after sweeps – researchers projected that overdoses would rise 30%, for instance.”
In 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that punishing homeless people for sleeping outside doesn’t count as cruel or unusual punishment, which allowed police sweeps to confiscate any property belonging to people sleeping on the streets. Since then, “roughly 150 cities in 32 states have passed or strengthened such ordinances,” Sequeira reported, with another 40 in the works at the time. “Bans often allow for steep fines and jail time,” he noted, but “Criminalizing homelessness doesn’t solve the problem — it just punishes people, makes it harder for them to find housing or jobs, and keeps them stuck in a cycle of instability,” Samantha Batko of the Urban Institute explained.
Homelessness is a worsening problem in Europe as well, the Guardian reported in September 2024, but Denmark and Finland are reducing it with a housing first policy, which shifts focus away from managing homelessness in the shelter system to solving it by providing housing. Finland started first, and has only a quarter of the number of homeless families it had in the early 2000s, and less than half the number of homeless individuals, with only a small fraction of those “unsheltered,” sleeping on the streets. So there are policies that work — they’re just not considered or reported on here.
Instead, we have a massive new punitive industry dedicated to destroying lives already in peril.
“While the national corporate media have not shied away from covering the nationwide displacement of homeless people, there has been virtually no coverage of companies profiteering from the homeless crisis in California or other states since Brian Barth’s investigation,” Project Censored noted.
U.S. police killed an average of nearly four people each day in 2024, disproportionately Black and Indigenous. Police killed more people in 2024 than in any year since 2013, when data collection began, and nearly two thirds were in response to 9/11 calls, the majority of which involved a non-violent offense, or no offense at all. These were some of the topline results of analysis by Mapping Police Violence reported by Sharon Zhang in a February 2025 Truthout article.
“Police killed at least 1,365 people in 2024,” and “Black people in the U.S. were 2.9x more likely than White people to be killed by police,” Zhang wrote, and they “were more likely than white people to be killed when unarmed or not posing a threat. The disproportion was even greater for American Indians and Alaska Natives (3.1x) and for Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (7.6x) compared to White people.” There were only 10 days in 2024, “when police did not kill anyone in the U.S.” An earlier report covering 1,260 instances found that officers were only charged with crimes in nine cases.
Zhang noted that these figures line up with reporting from the Washington Post that 2024 was the deadliest year on record for police violence, with 10,429 people killed by police in the last decade. However, the Post was discontinuing its tracking. “The change comes as the publication’s billionaire owner, Jeff Bezos, has exerted an increasingly right-wing influence on the paper,” Zhang observed. This came at the same time that Trump shut down a federal database tracking misconduct by federal law enforcement officers, which had only been in existence since December 2023.
“Mapping Police Violence was created by Samuel Sinyangwe, who is also the founder of Campaign Zero, an organization that advocates for a society not reliant on policing,” Project Censored noted. It’s findings have been neglected by the establishment press, with two exceptions they cited: one USA Today story in February 2025, using its data “for a report on demographic and geographic patterns in police killings in the United States,” and a May 2025 New York Times story reporting that “police killings keep rising, not falling,” since the murder of George Floyd in 2020, touching off the Black Lives Matter protests, the largest civil rights protests in US history.
Relatedly, “Routine police traffic stops often turn deadly, especially for people of color,” Project Censored noted, and this was the subject of another ignored investigation, specifically focused on the Chicago Police Department (CPD, carried out by Bolts and Injustice Watch and published in August 2024. A 2003 Illinois state law requires law enforcement agencies to report specific details of every traffic stop to the state Department of Transportation. But their investigation identified two hundred thousand unreported stops.
“The significant number of undocumented traffic stops threatens to undermine any reform efforts and obscures the true impact of the police encounters from oversight groups, preventing them from fully understanding which drivers are stopped, and where in the city they are concentrated,” journalist Pascal Sabino explained.
He had previously noted that these undocumented traffic stops amount to a new form of “stop-and-frisk,” a controversial practice that allows police to search persons, places and objects without making an arrest. CPD had officially moved away from using stop-and-frisk following the “botched investigation and cover-up” of the murder of teenager Laquan McDonald. But now, Chicago police “fish for guns and evidence of other crimes … by stopping cars rather than pedestrians,” Sabino wrote.
While the New York Times and others have covered how routine police stops often turn deadly, Project Censored noted, there had been no coverage of this exposure of “the extraordinary number of illegal, undocumented traffic stops by Chicago police.”
Rising ocean temperature could lead to a tipping point in the melting of Antarctic ice sheets, potentially triggering “runaway melting,” according to a June 2024 article published in the journal Nature Geoscience, and supported by two other recent studies. Robert Hunzikera in CounterPunch and Matthew Rozsa in Salon each reported on this research, warning of potential “tipping points” in Antarctic ice melt. “Scientists have debated whether a ‘tipping point’ exists for this ice sheet, or a moment when the effects of this melting would be suddenly both irreversible and catastrophic,” according to Rozsa. “A new study raises the bet on sea level rise, maybe by a lot,” Hunzikera summed up.
Drawing from recent evidence documenting that “relatively warm ocean water can intrude long distances” beneath the ice sheet and reach the grounding line — where the ice rises from the seabed and starts to float — the June Geoscience article warned that such “long intrusions have dramatic consequences for sea-level-rise contributions from ice sheets.” It proposed a new model accounting for these effects, which weren’t included in previous ice-sheet melting models.
As Rozsa explained in Salon,
When warm water moves under a grounding line, the ice melts at an accelerated pace and could pass a threshold where the body’s ultimate collapse is inevitable. While this process occurs, sea levels will rise at a much faster rate than currently predicted, resulting in millions of people from coastal communities being displaced over the upcoming decades and centuries.
In addition, “new studies show that small increases in ocean temperatures can have a big impact on melting,” Hunziker wrote. “These new facts raise very serious concerns about all projections of sea level rise.” At the same time, ocean temperatures have been setting new records for over a year, and an earlier paper in Nature Geoscience offered stark evidence of how quickly massive ice loss could happen. Researchers examined a 2,000-foot-long ice core and discovered that 8,000 years ago, at the end of the Ice Age, part of the ice sheet melted by 450 meters in about 200 years. “Antarctic ice meltdowns can happen much faster than current sea level studies assume,” Hunziker wrote.“Sea levels would begin to rise significantly in a matter of decades, rather than centuries, posing severe challenges for coastal cities, according to experts,” Project Censored summed up.
Rozsa also cited a May 2024 study in the journal PNAS, which predicted that “Antarctica’s so-called ‘Doomsday Glacier’ is nearing collapse, as revealed by high-resolution satellite radar data that shows Thwaites [Glacier] is being flooded with warm sea water,” he explained. It’s “known as the ‘Doomsday Glacier’ because it could greatly contribute to sea level rise if it collapses,” he wrote in an earlier story. “And new evidence suggests that’s exactly what’s happening.”
“To date, US corporate media have not covered these recent findings, especially Bradley and Hewitt’s model of grounding-zone melting of ice sheets,” Project Censored reported. “Independent outlets, including Salon and CounterPunch, have provided more substantial coverage of this study. Jessica Corbett of Common Dreams reported in February 2024 on the study that found evidence of rapid ice loss in the past, which CNN, the science news magazine Eos, and the environmental news site Earth.com also covered.”
People considered “working class” make up half the country’s labor force, but only 1.6% of state lawmakers, according to the 2024 results of a biennial study. That’s 116 of the nearly 7,400 state legislators, down from 1.8% in 2022. This seriously distorts the legislative process, both in terms of issues considered and solutions proposed, as noted in a March 15, 2024, Stateline article by Robbie Sequeira. “The only person that’s going to advocate for working-class people is a working-class person,” said freshman Idaho state Rep. Nate Roberts, a lifelong electrician.
“Government works best when all types of personal experience are at the legislative table,” said Minnesota state Rep. Kaela Berg, a flight attendant who ran for office while living in a friend’s basement. “I knew that I was uniquely able to speak on issues that my other colleagues never experienced.”
The study by political scientists Nicholas Carnes and Eric Hansen defined “working class” as “those who have currently or last worked in manual labor, the service industry, clerical, or labor union jobs,” representing 2% of Democrats and 1% of Republicans. Ten states have “no working-class state lawmakers.”
Some members of the Utah legislature (which includes police officers and teachers) objected to the characterization that they had no working-class members, but a 2024 Guardian op-ed explained that even including professionals like teachers and nurses, the number of working-class Democrats would still be under 6%.
“Low salaries for working-class jobs are one reason why members of the working class rarely run for office,” Project Censored noted. Amanda Litman, co-founder of Run for Something, which recruits candidates for down-ballot races, also cited a lack of access to money from family or partners, as well as gatekeepers who typically recruit candidates based on their independent money-raising ability.
Making things worse, only five states allow public financing options for state legislative candidates.
In Idaho, as a lone voice, Roberts spoke out against labor rollbacks “such as a Senate bill that would repeal limits on the number of hours and how late in the day a child under the age of 16 can work,” Sequeira reported. Pushback for opposing regressive child labor laws still shocked him, Roberts said.
In Minnesota, conditions were far more favorable. Berg helped pass the Minnesota Miracle, which included a major package of labor-friendly laws as well as a slew of tenant-landlord laws with renter protections. “Berg said the backgrounds of working-class legislators like herself can inform statehouse conversations, even if lawmakers with different backgrounds support pro-labor policies,” Sequeira noted.
In contrast, Project Censored notes the over-representation of wealth in our politics: the majority of the members of the 116th Congress were millionaires, with the 10 richest having estimated fortunes in excess of $30 million.
There’s a new move to change things, Project Censored noted: the formation of a political action committee called the Working Class Heroes Fund, aimed at organizing working-class voters and funding working-class candidates “across party lines to give the working class a seat at the table.” It was started by Dan Osborn, a pipe-fitter and union leader, who ran a surprisingly strong race for a U.S. Senate seat in Nebraska as an independent in 2024.
While there’s been no national corporate news coverage of the study on the class background of state legislators, there has been occasional mention in opinion pieces in both the New York Times and the Washington Post.
©Randomlengthsnews, San Pedro, CA 2025
In 2025, as many mourn the America they once knew, Anne’s Mourning Glory reflects that…
As usual, the ports led with their best news: All major pollutants are down from…
From having seen more than half of Long Beach Playhouse’s 13 prior stagings of A…
All of the Trani family’s restaurants are guided by excellence, longevity and community. Trani noted…
A county that can help reduce LA’s responsibilities to a manageable scale, and strengthen local…
Based on our investigation and other information that we are gathering, my staff and I…